avclub-072f76c18f8d7d526bd0d58166eb82ae--disqus
C.C. Baxter
avclub-072f76c18f8d7d526bd0d58166eb82ae--disqus

His frustrated boss eventually tells him, “I don’t owe you a living, Steven,” which fans will spark onto as the inspiration for the Smiths’ lyrics (and the title of this film), “England is mine / And it owes me a living.”

Yeah, I'm sure if you could show him various charts for crime level and global poverty, both of which have plummeted worldwide, he'd be pretty optimistic, even if there are a lot of visible problems.

Realism may be the wrong word when we're talking about giant robot wars or whatever, but in general I mean the ability to make fantasy a seemless part of the image. Now that that is fairly standard, the onus is on filmmakers to create effective images, not just ones that hide how much they look like effects.

Not only were they super cheap, but industry standards, but they won the Oscar. That's a great trend, in my view. I think visual oscars should be given out based on how effective they are, rather than how good. By now anyone can render anything and have it look realistic, but you need to be skillful to create the kind

So its similar to the Be Right Back episode of Black Mirror? I loved that one, and am curious to see this given how strong the reviews are, but it also seems like somewhat familiar territory.

Fair enough, I just more broadly meant people who work in comedy, as opposed to drama. Hard to think of anyone who is really the heir to Mel Brooks today, someone whose main goals are laughs as opposed to some of the other aims being discussed.

It's almost like traditional comedy — as in, funny lines, slapstick set pieces — have gone out of fashion, or that they're too "easy" or something for modern comics. Louie CK is one of the funniest stand-ups around, but Louie is rarely, if ever, laugh-out-loud funny (by design). Hard to think of anyone who is really

A great band name for a terrible band.

Yeah I guess so. Doesn't surprise me that a lot of the studio pictures are going to TV directors like the Russos, who can step in for an installment, keep the style intact but tell the story efficiently, and then step aside for the next one. Not necessarily a problem — I want the Marvel movies to be fairly consistent,

I just remember the "funeral" scene with the rotting dog carcass and Dee weeping blood from chili powder while Frank pushes Wolf Cola and nearly died at my desk. I honestly can't believe the shit that show gets away with.

I never got the hate that was showered on them for being in those movies. No one was pretending they were great, including them, and why would upcoming actors take leading parts in a major franchise? Then why is everyone shocked when the two of them, who beat out hundreds of others for the parts, ended up being

Right. I think part of the issue is that they know rudimentary film making — tilt the camera up to show someone is intimidating — and that plus generally good production elements (digital technology has improved that anyone can have professional looking cinematography) means they can look accomplished right off the

Yeah that's pretty dire, hard to see any gems in that group — they range from missed opportunities (the true story behind 21 is fascinating and could make for a terrific little film), to downright bad, to frankly embarrassing. Truly astonishing how at some point no executive is able to say, "hey, all these movies suck

Society needs to come together and admit that the Black List is full of hot horseshit. So many of the movies that originate from those are either garbage or made by people who shouldn't be considered for such a list (i.e. Tarantino).

How can someone get another writing job after Collateral Beauty?

Been really interesting to see how many of the directors swiftly called up to the majors (like Webb, the Jurassic World guy, and a couple others I've forgotten) actually and truly suck. If there was a normal system of these guys working their way up the ladder normally, building to bigger movies (or at least

There's one (I think called Premature?) that is similarly sexual. Every time the main character ejaculates or something, he's thrust back to the start of the loop. The moral is that he's supposed to bang his hot friend or something. It's worse than it sounds, and for such a stupid teen sex comedy its oddly chaste.

Yeah, C- for something shitty?

I heard it was closer to 40 days, although that seems too low.

I think its really effective in how it taps into the sense that the internet is this kind of ravenous beast, one that can spit up unending hatred and evil, and one that can push people into the kind of trolling stuff they'll likely forget.